Waterbury Municipal Meeting - September 2, 2026 - Development Review Board

Welcome to the September 2nd meeting of the Waterberry Development Review Board. My name is Dave Cingham. I am the chair of the board. Uh we'll go around starting on my left with introductions. >> Recording in progress. >> I'm Brooks Fortune. I'm a member of the board. Harry Shepard member boards board member. >> Um so before we get into this evening's agenda, I'm just going to go over how each hearing is going to be structured. Um we are a seven member board. We'll have five members present this evening. We need four votes in the affirmative for any project to be approved. Um if at any point you would like to have your project continued in hopes that for more to allow for more board members to be present that is you right and you can ask for that at any time and then we'll continue it to a date certain for each application. I will announce the uh application from the agenda have the applicants consultants introduce themselves and come up to the table um and I'll inquire about any members of the public to be heard on the application. will then swear in everybody who wishes to speak on that application at the same time. We'll first go through some housekeeping measures. Um and then they'll turn it over to the applicant and their consultants to explain their project. Um I'll then give town staff an opportunity to comment on any zoning irregularities that may be part of the application. And then we will go around the table and each board member will be given the opportunity to ask questions, make comments. Um staff will then be also given that opportunity. After that is done, um I'll just open it up to the board members for any follow-up questions. Once the board members are through with their questions and comments, I will then open it to public questions and comments. Um anybody who is in the room and wishes to ask questions, please come up so that the microphones can hear you. If after all questions have been asked, comments made, uh the board feels they have enough information to make a decision, um at our discretion, we may vote on the application at that time or we may go into an executive session at the end of the hearing. The concessions are private and you can reach out to town staff in the morning to find out what the outcome of that is. We go into executive session. We won't necessarily close the meeting because we may have further questions that come out of that. Any questions? All right. Um, >> if I could just please remind everyone to speak loudly and clearly, especially toward the owl so that our our folks online can also hear. That can be something of a a >> funky system. >> And we've got two sets of speakers. We've got the microphones for >> the TV and we've got a microphone for the owl. And this is the recording. This is the official recording of the hearing. >> Okay. And our live attendance on online. >> Yep. First item on the agenda is application 039-26 Peter Milm and Victoria Comr. Uh owner applicants 700 Ring Road Merberry Center. Applicants proposed to subdivide their 25 acre parcel into two lots. Lot one 14.9 acres and lot two of 10.1 acres. Property is in the low density residential and conservation zoning district as well as in the Ridgeline hillside steep slope overlay district. Projects in the overlay district require development review board review. Please come up and online right there. Okay. >> Zoom. Peter's on >> and uh he sent me a message saying for having me here today. I do apologize. I'm I'm not hearing uh the whole entire conversation, but do wanted to let you know I'm I am here and trying to trying to listen in. >> Thank you. Uh there are members public present to be heard on this application. Seeing none, please raise your right hands. You swear the evidence you shall give to this board shall be the truth, the whole truth, nothing but the truth. >> I do. I do. >> Here. Thank you. All right. And in our packet, we did have the butter letter and the notifications. So, we've got that. >> Yep. The certified notice are in there. >> Yep. Uh, all right. I will turn this over to guess John >> or I'll take on it. So, um, yeah, this, as Dave said, this project's for Pete Milan and uh, Tori Comr up at 700 Ring Road. They have two residences on the 25 acre parcel because in 2014 we gained approval from this board to construct a second residence and under section 403. Basically at that time we had to display a possible subdivision to meet the requirements of section 403 for two primary dwellings on one parcel. And so we are back here now to finish that subdivision. It is uh remains the same as it was approved in 2014 in terms of the lot line in between the two buildings. The only change is is that lot one uh was originally proposed at a smaller size. Um and so therefore in this final rendition we have a lot one of 14.9 acres and a lot two of 10.1 acres. Each proposed lot has one of the existing residences on it and each residence meets the applicable setbacks uh for structures and uh this is a low density conservation zoning districts. the conservation the zoning line kind of bisects the property almost in the middle and in either case though both proposed lots exceed the acreage required for the conservation zone. Um both residences are actually located in the low density residential section of the property. Um the existing driveway was approved in 2014 as well to the second residence which is 730 Ring Road on lot two there. And so that driveway is will be subject to a right of way across lot one to access lot two um centered on the ground. Uh the septic system for uh the 730 ring road lot is by easement on the other lot as shown here. Um the existing property is of an odd triangle shape with a wedge cut out of it where the Kazinski property is. And so there, you know, this division we feel like is makes plenty of sense given the shape of this land. And again, it is the same concept subdivision from 2019 plus or minus a change in that acres. [snorts] the homes the homes are constructed in the same location as previously pro proposed and approved. So we really do feel that we're kind of bringing you back the same proposal short of the change. >> So this is Monica Ken. She's a me board member. >> Oh. Well, I guess in kind of conclusion, there is no like new construction proposed. The driveway, the residence that was approved in 2014 exists. Uh like John said, you know, per the plans there built where it was uh proposed. And so this application doesn't propose any new construction exists. >> All right. Harry, >> I think I heard the thing that I wanted to just hear was that there's kind of going to be proper cross easements for the new lot across, you know, the portion of the existing lot that's on the lantern and Maine. Um, at this scale it's hard to kind of detect everything, but so I am I seeing like there's three buildings on the existing lot. >> Uh, there might be a shed, but there's only one primary. There's a larger. >> Yeah, there is. There is one shed behind the uh 700 ring road, a small probably 10 by 12 shed. And I don't know if it shows up, but there's a chicken coupe in front of the uh 7:30 [clears throat] about the size of a shed. >> It's a septic easement here, not a structure. Correct. Correct. Okay. >> There is a chicken coupe right below that septic that Pete just mentioned. It is not of a zonable structure size. It's a small shed. >> So, it's not shown, but it is there. And we will on the final subdivision survey have that 50 foot rightway across 700 down to 73 centered on the existing drive. Pretty simple since the drive already there. And Dave, I think I heard you say earlier and just for the record that this is off of a private portion of Ring Road. This is beyond the end of the >> class 4 town. >> Correct. >> That is correct. It's the same private rightway that serves John's lot actually adjacent here and a number of lots now that I think you guys are aware of multiple projects. >> Yep. That's exactly it. And this so it's also >> this this new lot can be conveyed rights across that private portion of Ring Road. >> There's a meandering 50ft rightway that follows Ring Road all the way up through and everybody has needed access to that right away. No further questions, bud. >> Yeah, it is a rather bizarre law. [clears throat] Just wondering about this ratio of width to depth one and five. Is has that been looked at? Is that has that come in right here? Um, I don't have an exact measurement on it, but I can. >> It's just that the depth isn't supposed to exceed five times. [snorts] >> The width is >> I think it was exceed on the existing lot. >> I would doubt it. How do you >> I think it was a non-conforming lot to start with. >> The width of the depth on the triangle is a little >> How do you do that? >> I don't know how to measure it. Oh, don't worry about it. >> Be honest. >> That's why I asked the question. >> This bench boy was created by that lot. So, like [clears throat] there is already a width there. >> There isn't like necessarily any magic to the lot layout. Like you wanted to make sure [clears throat] at least 10 acres on each. So, we didn't have to >> cuz we had talked about like with the split zone, do we do a 5 acre and then at least 10? Let's just do both do them 10 once you get beyond the homes. It was kind of >> woods out in there. And so I mean we picked this 10 acre lot to go with the 700 sorry the 730 the [clears throat] 14 to just remain with the smaller home but 700 >> and just for reference this is the shape of the lot. Yes. >> Oh, the exist. >> It's got 300 ft of farting. So, it would need >> less than 1,200 ft of depth, 1500 ft of depth. Okay. >> But there's no meets and bounds here, so I can't tell you what the depth is. >> Well, hopefully the neighbor won't gain control of that real narrow portion. >> You got more depth than that. I think that's >> one 100 plan. >> It's got I mean I guess if you're going to the point of the triangle, which you would I guess this is an odd shape, but I think we have 1700 ft of depth there on that 700 mark. There's there's there's no way to do it that doesn't exceed that five to one. >> Well, it's already there. So, >> I just thought I'd throw monkey wrench in. >> Some of these lots were created when Ring Road was there was no zoning obviously, but more literally this was all camps. >> Yeah. Triangles shaped like such a rare shape. I don't know how that >> Well, this is more than that. It looks like some kind of chicken. It was it was it was it was a triangle-shaped block and they took a chunk out of it for >> to get the Kinsky >> to sell it to whoever before Kazinski, I guess. >> Yeah. >> And that's all I have. >> I I do just want to note too as we're talking about each of these lots, lot one and two. The the map right now um has the has lot two labeled as 700 ring road and lot one labeled as zero ring road. But the E911 for the house on >> lot two is 730. >> Correct. Correct. >> And the other one E911 is 700. So there's no more zero ring road there. >> No, there is no 730. >> Just to make sure we're talking about the same addresses and the same lots. >> We are. >> The final survey will have it labeled correctly. >> Thanks for pointing that out. Looks like the drive is something the fire truck. >> Yeah. No, this isn't again this has to get a ring. >> Yeah, I know. >> This access was reviewed there in 14, but yeah, this is a nice drive access. Nothing steep. >> Monica, you have questions or comments? >> Yeah. Brooks. >> Um, out of curiosity, why is the lot two size smaller um, uh, than it w than it is or than it was as proposed in 2014? >> Well, I think uh, Pete >> No, I think it's Well, yeah. Okay, this one's smaller. Sorry. >> So, I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, but I think anecdotally, I think um Pete intended to uh keep the property at 730 Ring Road and then sell off 700. And so, he wanted more land of the house he was going to keep. His plans may have changed. So, he may be keeping 700 and selling 730. who wants to keep the land where the property he's going to hold larger, but that's >> that's an accurate representation. Um, we plan to potentially sell uh 730 Ring Road and keep 700 Ring Road. Um, and you know, I just asked Chris and John to come up with the, you know, the most reasonable lines um for the two properties given the irregular shape. So, um, this was what they had showed me as being a reasonable chunk of land to to and nice clean lines to go with the, uh, with 7:30 ring road and then the odd shape remaining on the on on, uh, 700. So, that that's an accurate representation. >> All right. Thank you. And, uh, even though 7:30 Ring Road doesn't technically exist yet, >> they both exist. They they they houses exist. The addresses exist. >> They do. Well, the address exist exists only for 911 purposes. >> Both both exist. >> Okay. >> Yeah. It's just that this map didn't align with that in terms of how the two lots were labeled. >> Yeah. I map has a label issue. The 730 residence on the 10acre lot is there >> and the 700 ring residence on the 14acre lot is there. >> Yes. the the >> 700 Great Run residence predates zoning. You know that house was built in the 70s >> and it was it was actually a camp first and in 2005 it was turned into an allseason residence. >> Okay. Um and then permit um permit 43-14-T in 2014 allowed the second residence on site um as long as in theory if they were a subdivision that residence met the setback requirements for the zoning district. And so they submitted a concept subdivision plan at the time in order to get the approval to build this second residence on the lot. And now they're doing the subdivision in actual fact with just a slightly adjusted size lot. And the setbacks are still met by that second residence as well as the first one that had been there since decades. >> Two addresses, two residences, one uns unsubdivided property as of right now. >> Correct. >> And that is and that is not in terms of E911. That is not um unusual when folks do say a a non um a se a detached sorry that was the word a detached ADU because it is a distinct structure on its own. E911 requires its own number. So the u the land records will generally go by um the primary residence or first residence. So, it's listed on our land records as 700 Ring Road, but it does have two addresses on it, and the state E911 board recognizes those two addresses as two distinct locations for emergency purposes. >> Okay. Um my my question is as to the the easements um the easements for um the septic and for ingress and egress. Have those been actually recorded or are those just easements in principle? >> We would record those once the subdivision is approved and final and the myar is recorded and then those things would be put into the deeds when the land is sold. >> Okay. But our final survey will show them uh and so therefore as the properties go to be conveyed all those rights will be shown. It'll also be detailed in your permit you know there needs to be access. We usually wait to do the final survey in case some sort of change happens here at TR meeting that we get the permit and then we'll file a myar because filing it coring another one on top and he owns all the land in both houses now. So there's no separate ownership to have a easement in place at the moment if that makes sense. All right, that's all I've got. That's good. >> Yeah. My only comment was, you know, show the show the right of way. Um, is that a mound system for a setting? >> It is. >> Okay. So, it doesn't need any extra space. >> Now, all my all my questions were asked. Any further questions or comments from the board? Any members of the public to be heard on this application? >> Cheryl, do you have any further comments or >> Thank you. >> Um, does the board feel enough information to make a decision? And if so, do you want to do that now or do we want to discuss this? >> I agree with Bob. Very good. Okay. And that's fine. we'll entertain a but before we do that um so a couple conditions for this um so how does the board feel about and the applicant feel about a condition that there'll be no clearing within the conservation district without board approval Yes, >> you're good with that, Pete. Right. Makes sense. >> All right. Um, I'm sorry. I heard something about a conservation district, but I didn't hear the whole sentence. There's a there's a condition on this approval that would be on the plat that there would be no clearing within the conservation district without DRV approval. >> Is it >> where exactly does the conservation is that on the other side of the the creek? >> On the other side of the brook, >> correct? >> Yeah. Um, >> can you see uh not yellow and green? >> No tree cut on the other side of the brook. >> Well, you can't clear it. So, you can selectively thin it for logging, >> but no clear cutting. >> No clear cutting. Yes, that's >> without without DRB approval. >> Yeah. It's not to say you can thou shalt never clear it. You could come in and maybe get an approval, but >> Right. But >> but it would be okay for me to go to and take a couple trees for firewood and you know here and there every year. >> Yes. >> Just just not hiring somebody to come in with it >> here and mow everything down. >> Correct. >> Correct. Correct. >> This is partly because it is in the conservation district and it is also in the uh the hillside ridge lines deep slope overlay district. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. I'm okay with that condition. >> Okay. And that that is something we do typically put on conditions in this in these districts. >> Yeah, it's pretty standard for this district. Question >> is just above the the dot um just above there is the line between low density above and conservation below and the RHS overlay covers in in its entirety. >> Correct. >> Just for reference. Um, and then there is a standard condition that you have 160 days. >> 180 days. >> 180. >> Well, we'd like to see it >> within 160. We'd like to see it in 160 and then that gives us two weeks to get it signed then get reported beneath the 180 map reflect the accessing between >> show the right of way the address there's no need to download there will be >> yeah I say I'm not I'm not going to list all those things you need to do Those are standard. Yep. We get that. All right. Board with those conditions. Any other discussion or suggestions, right? Entertain a motion. Sorry. Entertain conclusion. >> Sure. I'd offer. Based upon these findings and subject to the conditions set forth below, the board concludes a proposed project by Peter Melm for the subdivision of 7art Ring Road into two lots as presented in application number 039-26 and supporting materials meets the criteria set forth in sections 504 and 1202 Waterbury zoning regulations. Um, because this lot has two addresses, we either add the second one or reference it by the parcel ID number. >> Which way should I'm happy to amend the conclusion accordingly? And then I would offer on behalf of the Waterberry Development Review Board, I move to approve application 039-26 with the following requirements. The applicant should complete the project in accordance with the board's findings and conclusions and the approved plans and exhibits. Uh there should be no clearing within the conservation district without future board approval. and they're uh to submit a final record myar plaque for review and within 160 days >> and there's standard language that goes in that to meet the 180day statute that I'm happy to make that the motion we have a seconded by bud. All in favor? >> I I opposed. >> Thank you, gentlemen. Thank you very much. Thank you for being appreciate. >> Hey, thank you very much for your time, all. I do appreciate it. Hope you have a great night. >> This can be completely off the record, but we are very impressed with the new zoning administrators. We are very >> going very well in our opinion. >> Um, you guys submit I appreciate that. >> Plans in the future. Can you also include a digital copy? It's just really hard to read the scanned version. >> Definitely. >> Oh yeah, >> for sure. Yeah. >> And that Oh, yeah. I did I scan that? Yeah, I >> Okay, we will make sure. Yeah. Thank you. >> All right. Next item on the agenda, application 044-26. Brian and Jill drinkwater applicants and Phyllis Simon Honer 143 South Main Street in Waterberry. Applicant proposes to change the use of a building on the parcel in question currently zoned as a mixed residential and commercial use in the mixeduse zoning district and the design review overlay district and special flood hazard area overlay district. that propose converting the commercial space to a second residential unit. Change of use in the overlay district require DRB approval. >> Brian and Jill. >> Yes. >> Just for the record, could you introduce yourselves? >> I'm Brian Water. >> Welcome. And maybe members oppose be heard on this application hearing. Seeing none, >> I do have one amendment to it. >> We'll get sorry. Okay. Um, raise your right hand. Swear the evidence you shall give to this board shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> Excellent. Um, and we did have the notice to the letters and the right um receipts in our packets. So that all right. >> Uh, the only amendment I need to make is that we are now currently owners and >> Okay. Closed on. I guess I open my questions. I'm planning on buying it actually. All right. So, I'll turn it over to you to please. >> Yeah. I guess it was at some point Simons ran their business out of the first floor and lived on the second. Um an office. Uh we're working to turn it back into a residence. Two bedroom rentals property and we're living on the second floor. actually um just some kind of overall any changes to the outside of the building. And then the garage, nothing being added in the garage as far as renovating it, making it more habit. No, we'll um divide off um one day with the [clears throat] >> Okay. All right. Um Harry, questions. >> No, and I didn't drive by before and to see that they do [clears throat] have flood ports. Um there are three on kind of the north side >> and then two in the southwest corner. So I think at one point we might have had there were going to be some flood ports in the garage doors also going back but I want to say it looked like it would work fine. >> All it's just a it's a ratio of area to area enclosed space. >> Right. So, uh, >> is that what they were saying? >> Yes. But again, the whole buying process when you're asking people water, >> they they allow flood waters in and out. >> Okay. >> Of that phase of building the garage floor is a couple foot below the 100 flood level. >> Yeah. >> And so it it really kind of equalizes pressure on both sides so that you don't create structural problems with flooding. And so it's important to keep them functioning. >> That was good. Otherwise, >> okay. No, >> um, it says in here that the current water heater will also be moved to the garage. >> It's a possibility. Yes. >> Okay. >> Because right now it's in a closet, >> right? >> The home inspector didn't like the fire didn't like either. to get a deal. >> Okay. So, that's is is that a change to the garage then? >> That would be what we consider a change to the garage. So, that that would have to be up in the garage 2 ft above the flood. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. >> 4 foot level. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Any electrical going to it. That would all have to be up. Um, and you when if and when you decide to do that, you should come back and talk to Cheryl about that because you may need a permit to do that because the enforcement of our flood plan regulations is what helps people in town get a discount on their flood insurance. >> To get it period >> to get it period. Yeah. >> So, and those are important matter factors in in that. >> Okay. Since that um potential change interior was in their application, their project description, I can include the relevant um flood hazard bylaws uh pertaining to that and ensure that a condition is that the water heater will be elevated. That works if they plan to do it in the next two years. >> Okay. Why two? >> Because there's only permanent expires after two years. >> You have two you have two >> you have two years to start your project. So >> I mean yet yes we can do that but understand that if you do it it's been longer than two years you still have to come back. Yeah. And actually all all activities permitted by this have to be complete within 2 years say the bylaws. >> So um so anything that's not completed on this per bill you'd have to come back after two years. >> No I don't have any questions. Thanks David. >> Oh this is a great project to see some more. >> Good. >> Yeah. I think I think before it became office space, it was a a residential. >> Yeah, they never took it off the water. >> Yeah, I was reading that email. >> Welcome to H. >> Thank you. >> Uh members of the public seeing not board feel they have enough information to make a decision? >> I do. >> Ready to proceed with that? will entertain a conclusion. >> I don't have a script for this one. Did we get a script? >> No, because and my apologies. I just slammed the last week. >> Something. So, so it's the same language as the ring road one except that the sections are 301 site plan review and what's flood plane? Um flood plane is um >> 604 development standards. >> 604 and um >> 301 for site plan review. >> 301 for site plan review. Um and 108 What is that one for? >> Downtown design review over Lake District. >> So you are in the downtown design over Lake District. So you can change that Cheryl if you want to change something about the exterior of the building. Okay. >> Make sure you come. >> Okay. >> Um and also um 16 05B with regards to um permitted uses in the mixeduse zoning district. And >> number again please. 1605 >> 16005B. And that's of the >> that a two family dwelling two units is a permitted use in that district. [clears throat] >> All right, let's give it a go. So based upon these findings and subjected to the conditions set forth below, the board concludes the proposed project by Brian and Jill Dink with >> an [laughter] at 143 South Main Street. Um, >> everything's filled in but the highlighted stuff >> as presented in application 044-26 and supporting materials meets the criteria set forth in sections 301 604 11108 and 1605B of the Waterberry zoning regulations >> and the unified development bylaws phase one. That was right there, too. [laughter] >> And on behalf of the Waterberry Development Review Board, I move to approve application 44-26 with the following requirements. that the applicant shall complete the project in accordance with the board's findings and conclusions and the approved plans and exhibits. >> And the water heater is the the water heater moved to the garage is elevated um according to >> 2 ft above the >> two feet above two feet above the flood plan. >> That's my motion. >> We have a second. >> I'll second now. Second by bud. >> Well done. >> All in favor? >> I >> I. >> Any opposed? >> Congratulations. >> Thank you very much. >> I I assume cut >> Japanese notweed. Yes. >> Thank you. >> So there are a few more steps in getting the paperwork finalized and signed and so forth. So, you will be hearing from me um in the the next couple of weeks to get this completely >> permitted and official. >> Thank you so much for your help. >> Thank you. >> Appreciate it. >> Yeah. I apologize for not seeing the front gates. I was looking at the doors. I [laughter] >> Well, the garages is where you most frequently see them. >> Yeah. Well, my one eye didn't pick up on the ice. >> That's all right, bud. We got you covered. I know. >> Well, and my apologies to everybody for not having the ordinances filled in on the staff report. Um, I have been slammed. >> Absolutely. No problem. >> It's what I was working on when I muddle through it. >> That was great teamwork. What >> you person? >> Oh, what's what's going on? Why are you Why are you so busy? No, you didn't. >> All right. Um, >> I assume we don't have any public comments this evening. >> I don't think we have public. >> We are moving the town's business, are we? >> We're moving along. >> Um, we also do not have minutes to approve because when I finally got a chance to look them over, I found that they were only um half uh half updated. It was sort of a a template from the last meeting where the last meeting information was half of it. So, we're going to have to do that next time on September 16th. >> Okay. And was I wasn't at that last meeting. Was that application approved? it was. But in um zoning administrator business, [clears throat] um those folks have come back to me to acknowledge that um due to an illness, they had to switch to a new contractor who said that the plans they submitted for the height of the barn um with the 15t setback waiver, you folks remember that one. um >> uh were were untenable and that the height needs to be 29 ft and not 19 ft. And since there was a setback waiver involved in that approval, um I wanted to get your recommendations on whether this needs to be um redone, amended, um how to proceed because there's a dimensional change to that mark. That's considerable. >> That's significantly different. >> I mean, that was part of it that it sat down well and the roof elevation wasn't very high. >> Um, >> so that's the that's what happened there. >> I would have applications. >> If it was one foot higher, they'd have to come back. >> No, it's it's 10 ft. >> Of course. >> So, and I and I said to >> we we could determine that to be a minor issue. >> Yeah. Yes. I guess you're right. >> Right. only. But no 10v definitely not. >> Yeah. Only because there's a setback waiver in otherwise I would have taken care of this. But that setback waiver >> we could say we we could say we hope it's not untenable. [laughter] >> I don't 10. >> Yeah. That's that's a strange word for a contract, >> right? >> Or maybe he said it's not going to work. Sorry. >> I editorialized. [laughter] >> Okay. >> I like picturing him saying Unable. >> All right. that. So that is going to come back to you. Um we don't have time for that to be um next time September 16th we will meet and um review the Chittenden application that was originally scheduled for tonight. They did not do >> that >> certified mail um in time. So I rescheduled them for next time and moved that process along. Um, and then an FYI, there will be no meeting in October because um, the first week of October I am in Ireland. Um, and Neil is unavailable to cover for me. And the second meeting in October, Neil and I are both at a planning conference in Manchester. Um, so neither one of us is. >> So, do we have any do we have any timing potential timing issues? If something comes in that doesn't work out with that, >> the only potential timing is this setback. >> The setback. Yeah, they've got the barn. >> They've got to submit a whole new application. That can't just be considered a continued application. >> Okay. >> Right. So, so there's that. We do have um at least one that is amendable to November, which would be the next available meeting dates. >> You're going to have one from me tomorrow. >> An application. >> Right. >> Great. >> Not in October. >> So, >> it is what it is. >> Just what I need. >> That's great. >> Um >> so October 14th is not happening. >> No. So, our next meeting is the first one. >> So, it's October. The next one is this month and then and then November. >> Great. >> October 7th or October 21st are the two scheduled meeting dates. >> Oh, okay. >> And Neil and I are both indisposed on those nights. >> Vacation, right? >> Right. 7th and 21st. >> Great. >> I will be turning 50 in Ireland and not caring what you all are doing. >> Um, >> and the other one's work will be at a conference. Um, and that's that's it for me this time around. >> Oh, we could use a little spatical. >> We could we could I'm just going to do a plug. We could um meet with the planning commission. >> I I was I'm about to suggest that. >> That's brilliant. >> Yep. >> Because I know that they want to pick your brains a little more and get some >> I think that's I think that's a great plan. >> Great plan. >> I can't do Oh, I can't do it on the set. I can't do it on the 14th. >> Interesting. >> Okay. >> I like that. We wanted to make more parking spaces by reducing the length of the ones we have. >> The length of the width. >> The length. >> If all the parallel parking spaces could shorten, >> we could gain more space. >> That's true. As long as we all drove small cars. >> All right. >> All right. You plan on >> Yep. You can turn the recording off. Okay. >> [music]